Martin Golding has no problem in arguing that our obligations towards future generations are negligible. Before he delves into his argument about obligations he sets up three preliminary questions that need to be addresses. Who and what are the individuals to whom we owe these obligations, and to what class of obligation do they belong. In the first part of his piece he argues that obligations to future generations are essential for the sake of the future community. However, I have several concerns with that; one of which is what is the future? He seems to generalize the future, but does he mean generations from now, or a few years from now. I feel as though no time is better than the present, we have things going on in society that we need to address now- everything from disease to destruction of the Earth. Which takes precedence over the other? That brings up the subject of weight, which is more important. Humanity or the environment… However, trying to stay on track… in the later part of his essay he then turns around to say that present peoples’ should not have any obligation to future fellows. “It is doubtful that we should regard ourselves as being under an obligation to future generations (pg 363).” We don’t know what values they will uphold, what inventions will be introduced, and what futuristic problems may occur. How can we uphold obligations to people who have yet to exist? Golding discusses pollution and curbing population growth and asks how we can have such obligations without the collective effort of the people. It is tough to determine outcomes without the membership of the future generation. Our actions now will determine our future. As Golding states, “whether we have obligations to future generations in part depends on what we do for the present (pg. 364).”
Monday, October 12, 2009
Martin Golding
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment